Impact of Cryopreservation of Peripheral Blood Stem Cells (PBSC) in Transplantation from Matched Unrelated Donor (MUD).

Gabriele Facchin, Chiara Savignano, Marta Lisa Battista, Miriam Isola, Maria De Martino, Giuseppe Petruzzellis, Chiara Rosignoli, Umberto Pizzano, Michela Cerno, Giulia De Cecco, Antonella Bertone, Giovanni Barillari, Renato Fanin, Francesca Patriarca
Author Information
  1. Gabriele Facchin: Division of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  2. Chiara Savignano: Department of Transfusion Medicine, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  3. Marta Lisa Battista: Division of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  4. Miriam Isola: Department of Medical Area (DAME), University of Udine, Via Colugna 50, 33100 Udine, Italy. ORCID
  5. Maria De Martino: Department of Medical Area (DAME), University of Udine, Via Colugna 50, 33100 Udine, Italy. ORCID
  6. Giuseppe Petruzzellis: Division of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  7. Chiara Rosignoli: Division of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy. ORCID
  8. Umberto Pizzano: Division of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  9. Michela Cerno: Division of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  10. Giulia De Cecco: Department of Transfusion Medicine, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  11. Antonella Bertone: Department of Transfusion Medicine, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  12. Giovanni Barillari: Department of Transfusion Medicine, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  13. Renato Fanin: Division of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  14. Francesca Patriarca: Division of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 10, 33100 Udine, Italy.

Abstract

Background: Cryopreservation of PBSC for allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) was implemented due to the current Coronavirus 2019 pandemic. The impact of match unrelated donor (MUD) graft freezing on the outcome of allo-HSCT in terms of hematological recovery, graft versus host disease (GVHD), and survival are still controversial. Methods: In this study, we compared graft composition, clinical characteristics, and outcome of 31 allo-HSCT from MUD cryopreserved PBSC (Cryo Group) with 23 matched-pair allo-HSCT from fresh MUD PBSC (Fresh Group) performed in our center between January 2020 and July 2021. Results: No significant differences were recognized in clinical characteristics of patients, donors, and transplants between the Cryo and Fresh groups except for a better prognostic comorbidity index (HCT-CI) of the Cryo group. In the Cryo Group, the median time from apheresis to cryopreservation was 46.0 h (range 23.8−53.5), while the median time from cells collection and reinfusion was 13.9 days (range 5.8−28.1). In the Fresh Group, median time from apheresis to reinfusion was 35.6 h (range 21.4−51.2). The number of viable (7-AAD negative) CD34+ cells per kg patient infused was significantly lower in the Cryo Group (5.2 ± 1.9 × 106/kg vs. 7.0 ± 1.3 × 106/kg; p < 0.001). Indeed, there was a 36% (11−70) median loss of viable CD34+/kg cells after freezing. All patients engrafted: median time to neutrophil engraftment (>0.5 × 109/L) was 13.5 days (range 12−15) for Cryo Group and 14 days (range 13−16) days for Fresh Group (p = 0.522), while the median time to platelet engraftment (>20 × 109/L) was, respectively, 14 (range 12−18) and 15 (range 12−17) days (p = 0.904). The incidence of grade ≥ 2 acute GVHD was similar in the two groups (56.5% Cryo Group vs. 60.0% Fresh Group; p = 0.832) and no differences in terms of OS (p = 0.090), PFS (p = 0.200) and TRM (p = 0.970) were observed between the Cryo and Fresh groups. Conclusions: In our series, no differences between the Cryo and Fresh groups were found in engraftment, grade ≥ 2 acute GVHD incidence, OS, PFS, and TRM despite a lower CD34+ infused dose in the Cryo Group. Frozen PBSCs could be considered a safe option also for allo-HSCT from MUD but a higher amount of PBSC should be collected to warrant an adequate viable CD34+ post-thawing.

Keywords

References

  1. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2017 Dec;52(12):1599-1601 [PMID: 28650454]
  2. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2021 Apr;56(4):798-806 [PMID: 33219340]
  3. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015 Nov;21(11):1863-1869 [PMID: 26256941]
  4. Cytometry B Clin Cytom. 2012 Jan;82(1):54-8 [PMID: 21936048]
  5. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020 Jul;26(7):1312-1317 [PMID: 32283185]
  6. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020 Jul;26(7):e161-e166 [PMID: 32389803]
  7. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2007 Oct;13(10):1233-43 [PMID: 17889361]
  8. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2008 Jul;42(2):121-8 [PMID: 18391988]
  9. Br J Haematol. 2011 Aug;154(4):441-7 [PMID: 21726206]
  10. Am J Hematol. 2021 Feb 1;96(2):179-187 [PMID: 33108034]
  11. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014 Mar;20(3):295-308 [PMID: 24141007]
  12. Transplant Cell Ther. 2021 Jun;27(6):507-516 [PMID: 33865804]
  13. Blood Adv. 2021 Dec 14;5(23):5140-5149 [PMID: 34581754]
  14. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2018 Nov;53(11):1401-1415 [PMID: 29872128]
  15. Transplant Cell Ther. 2021 Aug;27(8):664.e1-664.e6 [PMID: 33964514]
  16. Transplant Cell Ther. 2021 Aug;27(8):697.e1-697.e5 [PMID: 33991721]
  17. Transfus Apher Sci. 2020 Apr;59(2):102753 [PMID: 32305212]
  18. Transplant Cell Ther. 2022 Apr;28(4):215.e1-215.e10 [PMID: 35042013]
  19. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2014 Jul;49(7):865-72 [PMID: 24686988]
  20. J Immunol Methods. 2009 Aug 15;347(1-2):87-90 [PMID: 19538964]
  21. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2020 Oct;55(10):2043-2044 [PMID: 32203269]
  22. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2021 Oct;56(10):2489-2496 [PMID: 34127808]
  23. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2006 Sep;38(6):399-405 [PMID: 16892075]
  24. Eur J Haematol. 2013 Nov;91(5):448-55 [PMID: 23710624]
  25. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013 Feb;48(2):243-8 [PMID: 22732701]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0CryoGroup0Freshrangepmedian=PBSCallo-HSCTMUDtime5daysgroupscells2×engraftmentstemgraftGVHDdifferences1viableCD34+Cryopreservationcelltransplantationunrelateddonorfreezingoutcometermsclinicalcharacteristics23patientsapheresiscryopreservationhreinfusion139infusedlower±106/kgvs109/L14incidencegradeacuteOSPFSTRMBackground:allogenichematopoieticimplementedduecurrentCoronavirus2019pandemicimpactmatchhematologicalrecoveryversushostdiseasesurvivalstillcontroversialMethods:studycomparedcomposition31cryopreservedmatched-pairfreshperformedcenterJanuary2020July2021Results:significantrecognizeddonorstransplantsexceptbetterprognosticcomorbidityindexHCT-CIgroup468−53collection8−28356214−51number7-AADnegativeperkgpatientsignificantly73<001Indeed36%11−70lossCD34+/kgengrafted:neutrophil>012−1513−16522platelet>20respectively12−181512−17904similartwo565%600%832090200970observedConclusions:seriesfounddespitedoseFrozenPBSCsconsideredsafeoptionalsohigheramountcollectedwarrantadequatepost-thawingImpactPeripheralBloodStemCellsTransplantationMatchedUnrelatedDonorGvHDallogeneicmatchedperipheralblood

Similar Articles

Cited By